09 April 2017 12:43 AM

Now we have definitely moved from being a post-war world to being a pre-war world. Madness and folly are loose again.

Consider first that early on Friday morning the United States Navy launched 59 cruise missiles on behalf of Al Qaeda.

If this is not bad enough for you, note that the President of the United States did not even bother to pretend that he was seeking United Nations cover for what he did.

Note next that in the same week our Prime Minister, Theresa May, made a duty visit to pay homage to the medieval despots of Saudi Arabia, who kindly buy our warplanes and bombs, and are currently using them to savage effect in Yemen.

And President Trump was playing host at the White House to the head of Egypt’s military junta, General el-Sisi, whose security forces undoubtedly massacred at least 600 protesters (probably many more) in the streets of Cairo in August 2013.

And then mark that the pretext for this bizarre rocket attack was an unproven claim that President Assad of Syria had used poison gas.

Yes, unproven. The brutality of Sisi and the Saudis is beyond doubt. They didn’t use gas, but our leaders’ outrage at Assad’s alleged gas attack looks a little contrived if they keep such company.

Also what happened to the rules of evidence? Many people have written, spoken – and now acted – as if the charge was proven. Why the hurry?

Now, Mr Assad is not a nice person. I have been writing rude things about his bloodstained and wicked regime for years.

But he is not insane. He knows that the use of poison gas is the one thing that will make the USA intervene against him.

They have said so. He is currently winning his war against Islamist fanatics, with conventional weapons. He had even finally got the USA to stop demanding his dismissal.

Five days before the alleged attack – five days! – America’s UN ambassador, Nikki Haley, announced: ‘Our priority is no longer to sit there and focus on getting Assad out.’

So why would he do such a thing, and throw away all his victories in a few minutes? It makes no sense of any kind. As you ponder this, can I explain something about the place where the gas attack is said to have happened?

No independent Western journalist could go there. He or she would be killed or kidnapped within hours.

Any report which comes from that region is filtered through people who you never see in the film that does get out. I have met men like them on my travels. I would not want to offend them.

These are the Jabhat Fateh al-Sham, alias the Al-Nusra Front, alias Al Qaeda, the Syrian ‘opposition’ which we in the West have been supporting for several years.

Yes, that’s right, the people we have been helping are not Liberal Democrats or Girl Guides or Quakers.

No, they are the same movement which destroyed Manhattan’s Twin Towers.

The only big difference between them and Islamic State is that we drop bombs on Islamic State. And we drop bombs on behalf of Al-Nusra/Al Qaeda.

I’ve noted here before how these people have publicly kidnapped, killed and even sunk their teeth into the entrails of dead enemies. But in this case, another small detail may make you wonder about what you are being told.

In some reports of the alleged atrocity, a supposed ‘British doctor’, Shajul Islam, was quoted or shown on the spot, described as a ‘volunteer treating victims in hospital’.

Actually, he shouldn’t really be called a British doctor.

He was struck off the British medical register for ‘misconduct’ in March 2016.

The General Medical Council won’t say why. And in 2012 Shajul Islam was charged with terror offences in a British court.

He was accused of imprisoning John Cantlie, a British photographer, and a Dutchman, Jeroen Oerlemans.

Both men were held by a militant group in Syria and both were wounded when they tried to escape. Shajul Islam, it was alleged, was among their captors.

Shajul Islam’s trial collapsed in 2013, when it was revealed that Mr Cantlie had been abducted once again, and could not give evidence.

Mr Oerlemans refused to give evidence for fear that it would further endanger Mr Cantlie. Mr Oerlemans has since been killed in Libya. So the supposedly benevolent medical man at the scene of the alleged atrocity turns out to be a struck-off doctor who was once put on trial for kidnapping.

Does this change your view at all? It takes a couple of minutes to find this out if you look. But only one major Western news outlet, The Times, has put two and two together. Why is that?

It’s for the same reason that we are in this mess. We wish to fool ourselves and are good at it.

The once-wealthy and powerful West is falling to bits.

It is bankrupt and increasingly at the mercy of people who have begun to demand something in return for their trade and their loans.

It is all very sordid, and bodes ill for the future, but I would mind it less if we admitted what we were doing, rather than pretending these wretched events were some sort of noble act.

Technology will enslave us all... just like Scarlett

Had I been a teenage boy, I would probably have appreciated Scarlett Johansson’s new film Ghost In The Shell more than I did.

I don’t enjoy ultra-violence, or even the sight of Ms Johansson got up as a robot as much as I would once have done.

But I was intrigued to see that the future world in which this film is set is – once again – in a place of gloom and decay, much like now but worse.

There are gangsters and sordid bars, people smoke, everyone’s crammed into hamster-cage flats in inhuman megacities.

People still drive cars. Ever since Blade Runner and Alien, and also in Minority Report, new technology is not seen as a road to happiness, liberty or prosperity.

I used to think this was pessimistic. Now I think they’ve got it about right.

Politicians belong in cattle class

Why should politicians have special aeroplanes to waft them about the place?

Of course, the heir to the throne should take priority over a mere Premier when it comes to allocating RAF jets. Air Force One has given them all delusions of grandeur.

Monarchs need to be grand. Ministers don’t. Politicians should travel just like the people they represent.

Most especially they should be made to endure the futile humiliation of airport security, and the realities of railway privatisation.

********

I miss my last blue passport, sadly stolen, with its parade of blurred visas from Warsaw Pact states and my Moscow Residence Permit for a very grand address.

But I don’t think they’ll ever bring it back as it was.

It was a survivor from a statelier age. The best we can hope for is a weedy, blueish plastic booklet, all too similar to the miserable things we have now.If you want to comment on Peter Hitchens, click on Comments and scroll down

Share this article:

Comments

You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Ky: I've never been to Syria either, but my understanding (and I'm open to correction) is that Syria resembles other mediterranean cultures in that families often keep pretty late hours. However your point about the presence of babies on the street shortly after an alleged chemical attack is very well made. The apparent lack of due concern for personal safety among white helmets while treating victims of the alleged attack, is also worthy of note.

'. I devoted an entire post to the question of who was responsible for the 2013 Ghouta attack. Mr Skalla obviously hasn't read it, and he looks very silly and lazy as a result. Let that be a warning to others. Read before you write'

Look, Peter: perhaps you don't remember, but we had friendly exchanges years ago and I posted many comments on your blog in the early 2000s.

I admit to being out of touch with your output since then.

I can't see how that makes me silly or lazy.
***PH remarks: Because he posted here before reading what I had said. ***

I wasn't seeking a personal argument with you and, indeed, when I commented in your blog years ago, I generally expressed agreement with your views.

***PH writes: I don't care. I hope for readers, not fans. ***

I have read some of your articles in recent years and have noticed that you seem to have reacted rather heatedly to what seemed to be provocative comments.

****PH : I have reacted with exasperation to comments made by someone who has not bothered to read before writing***

I was not in any way trying to provoke you and when I said 'That means you have to prove two frame-ups ...' I didn't mean you personally in particular, which seems to be the way you took it.

I meant the colloquial 'you' which means 'one'.

I don't see any need to get personal.

P.S. And, by the way, you're the first person ever to have told me I'm 'one of the crowd.'
You never said that when I posted comments on your blog years ago.
You never, in fact, made any critical remark about anything I posted!
If I had been 'one of the crowd,' I would never have posted on your blog in the first place.

***Well, he is one of the 'Assad is guilty because everyone says so' crowd now. ***

Joshua Wooderson | 14 April 2017 at 11:55 AM :
*** and in the Ghouta attacks at least, the chemicals used matched a formula known to have been developed by the Syrian government ***

But hardly unique to them, since it is known and could be replicated.
For instance, Turkey has the stuff and supplies the terrorists with it.
Plenty of empty and full bags of chemical warhead materials have been found in places such as east Aleppo, from where the jihadists were bombarding west Aleppo with cannister bombs -- yes, what can definitely be described as barrel bombs -- fired from large-bore mortars. But the US/UK are oddly keen not to officially recognise, investigate or to any significant extent even report that....
But a very important point you ignore is that two of the areas of Syria where there had been chemical weapon stores prior to the removal (verified by an international team including Americans) of all government held stocks, were under terrorist control and to these the removal squad were denied access by these "moderates".
So terrorist outfits do still have the stuff....

*** and the weapons used to deliver the sarin were ones known to be in Assad's inventory.***

In everyone's inventory (notice above mentioned stores).
But despite much hysterical warmongering by Western politicians, 2013 eventually turned out to have been done by the terrorists ... fired using short-range rockets from within a terrorist stronghold -- not from and by the government side.

You still have not explained how selfie-obsessed "responders" and others in the recent incident featuring Sarin have been able to immediately handle bodies (alive or dead) without even using protective gloves. But they could not do so without the Sarin killing them as well. A *very* big contradiction in their films.
Films and assertions on the basis of which a barrage of missiles was fired....
Also, where's the inevitable mess that Sarin would induce? In video promoting the jihadist side's version of events and touted by Western politicians and mass-media, it is nowhere to be seen.
Finally, has it still not struck you as peculiar that an organisation that's known to be massively funded -- well over $100 million -- by the UK Foreign office, US State Department and Soros can operate so safely, collaboratively and freely (not to mention exclusively) within areas totally controlled by IS/al-Nusra, including their command headquarter areas?
Are jihadi terrorists not alleged to be the *enemy* of Western powers?

I have to add that someone who lives there (Syria) writes that the attack/attacks (if there were ’ordinary’ bombing + CW attack) was/were early in the morning, many people were still at home or sleeping, he writes… I am just thinking why those little babies were outside of the houses and strong young fathers were inside of the houses or some other places at that time? (I believe the father to the dead twin babies was a farmer and working somewhere from home.)

I have never been to Syria, but does anyone know how they live - around what time they usually get up and small babies can be left outside before 7:00 AM? Why the small children were outside when bombs were exploded just a while ago?

And some ’eye witnesses’ said the explosion smoke was unusually ’coloured’, but as far as I know Sarin itself is colorless, isn’t it? But those are only simple questions, may be they are easy to be answered. (I am sorry I cannot give the sources what I write above right now, may be later.)

Of course, I am in a process of thinking and trying to understand the issue as a whole, although I know it seems impossible. But I think this is one of the ways I could express my anger and sadness towards the atrocities happening upon Syrian people.

I have not claimed that I knew something about who made Sarin (if it was used on 4 April 2017) and who used it and how used it and why - I have just a lot of questions… I am only grateful if I could know something about those questions for sure. In that sense we can help each other to find out the truth, at least some part of it.

You quoted me,
'it was evidently possible to carry out Sarin attack rather easily in Tokyo in 1995 by Aum sect. They could bring sarin personally into the subway carriages without being noticed by others'

Then you begun talking about the production of Sarin among others.

But my point is that there might be other possibilities than using bombs to spread the CW, namely some individuals could carry Sarin (in liquid-form) in plastic bags as Aum members did. Then they made several holes on the plastic bags with the sharpened edges of umbrellas when they almost arrived at the stations and run away from the carriages.

I have other questions regarding how and where Sarin (if it was used) was made and brought to the place - but I don’t know it. I only read some people (a Turkish MP and a Syrian diplomat as I mentioned before) with real names publicly stated or questioned if Turkey (we do not know who) was somewhat connected to it.

2 events of the past week draw remarkable parallels, and coincidentally both cases involve doctors. Dr Dao, the physician brutally removed from a United Airline flight in Chicago and President Assad of Syria whose country was struck by 59 Tomahawk missiles on the orders of POTUS.
69 year old Dr Dao had the legitimate right to a seat on the flight on the aircraft;t here is no doubt he had paid for it. Then because of United Airlines greed in ensuring that its flights are 100% full - too many people turn up for the flight. One honourable resolution immediately available - bring in an extra aircraft - even a small to ensure that every paying passenger gets the deal they signed up for. But no, this costs money and reduces profits. So we hear that the UA policy on overbooking is to a random seat draw and the unfortunate person is removed from the plane. (It may well have been that a UA crony need the seat). To justify Mr Dao's removal we hear of him being disruptive, belligerent etc. and that UA had used ' A Law' i.e lottery. ( We hear worse adjectives about Assad, murderer, criminal, barbarian etc.) But that is the first set of the play - words, name calling, accusations. Next step is 3 security thugs enter the aircraft and forcibly removing the elderly passenger using brutal cowardly tactics causing injury to Dr Dao and could easily have killed him. Step forward the CEO of United Airlines claiming the assault on the passenger was fully justified and that he stood behind them. To Syria - 59 Tomahawk missiles fired at Syria by the US after hearing (unconfirmed) reports of chemical weapons used on innocent civilian including women and children. Step forward - Donald Trump to call the commanders of the ships congratulating them on their work, work which they were ordered to do despite the president (once again) not having checked the full facts or the detail. Then as in the airline case the the name calling and the claims that the evil Assad has committed war crimes and broke 'The Laws'.
So as it stands to date the duplicitous and cowardly CEO of United Airlines has backtracked and his dreadful company will suffer far great financial losses once Dr Dao case become before a court. (I can't help wonder if this CEO has had a moment of reflection wishing 'he'd checked things first' - probably not! ). In this case the passenger is likely to rightly recieve compensation, grovelling apologies and the United Airlines company shares go into nosedive . So in this case it may be that justice wins the day
As for the other case with US and it's president? We can never know from a man who doesn't check facts, acts on impulse and is unable to tolerate criticisms. So instead of an investigation to verify the facts and repair the damage, we'll have further denials .. and dare I say it -- further escalation of his destructive mindset.. Which as I write, has already happened - with the US dropping the largest non-nuclear bomb ever used in combat in Afghanistan. This is where lies and distortion get us...... and whilst the word Truth is often used, it is despised, because it hurts egos.

Ky – 'The supposed benefits, such as Mr Wooderson writes, are overwhelmingly too small in comparison with the supposed risks for Assad, I would say.'

With respect, this is just your interpretation, and is at least as speculative as mine. I'll concede that there are experts on both sides of this debate (more commonly, experts who say the evidence is inconclusive), but certainly there are many who agree with me that Assad had ample reason to carry out CW attacks.

'it was evidently possible to carry out Sarin attack rather easily in Tokyo in 1995 by Aum sect. They could bring sarin personally into the subway carriages without being noticed by others'

Actually, the Aum Shinrikyo attacks if anything confirm my point about the rebels lacking the resources for an attack like this. To quote an article in the Register 'Homebrew chemical terror bombs, hype or horror?' (which is well worth reading for a sense of just how difficult it is to successfully carry out CW attacks): 'Aum Shinrikyo spent $30 million, and had a team of trained scientists, top-class equipment and at least one factory at its disposal. In addition it benefited from the frankly inexplicable Japanese security climate of the time, which left the cult free to do dangerous and scary things, to purchase and stockpile ingredients and equipment and even to conduct live tests of distribution mechanisms on real victims.'

Despite this, Aum produced only seven kilograms of sarin, compared with the 400 plus required for the East Ghota attacks in 2013 (I don't how much was needed for the latest attack, but presumably more than 7kg).

There's also the fact that - unlike the rebels - we know Assad has produced CW on a large scale, and in the Ghouta attacks at least, the chemicals used matched a formula known to have been developed by the Syrian government, and the weapons used to deliver the sarin were ones known to be in Assad's inventory.

I must admit to feeling somewhat pecker (in the old-fashioned English meaning of that word) after reading it. As someone who's offered the odd critical comment about Trump in recent months, criticism that was often met with either stony silence or mild rebukes (thank heaven for the moderators), it's now quite rewarding to observe at least a few changes of opinion taking place.

I wonder how Farage, had he been appointed US ambassador in London (a thought that still leaves me chuckling), would have dealt with recent events, events he appears to disagree with.

I also wonder whether any future Marx Brothers look-alikes will make a film of all this...

The fact that the Syrian Air Force carried out the bombing - although Assad has since come close to denying this, when he said the targeted area had 'no strategic importance' - and, if the French are correct - there was no resulting fire in the building - is surely overwhelming evidence of Assad's culpability.

***PH comments: To say that a target has no strategic importance is not to say that it had no *tactical* importance. Ether he said it did not take place, or he did not do so. I did not think there was any dispute that the Syrian air force had bombed Khan Sheikhoun at about 3.30 a.m. GMT on 4th April. ****

How could any conspiracy have counted on Assad targeting a place of no strategic importance and placed Sarin inside it without the occupants noticing?

***PH writes. Indeed. But Mr Skalla is assuming that we *know* anything about this event apart from the undisputed fact of an air attack. May I stress yet again that there is *no* independent source for the reports that we have, which come from an area under the control of an Al Qaeda affiliate. Has Mr Skalla been a reporter in an area controlled by such people? Does he begin to know the limitations on independent investigation which it imposes? The anti-Assad forces in Syria have been backed from the start by wealthy and powerful states in the Gulf. Is it impossible to conceive that they might maintain a sophisticated propaganda organisation? Indeed, if one looks at Western coverage of recent events in Aleppo, in which an Al Qaeda affiliate successfully portrayed itself as an assembly of unarmed civilians, I think we must assume that such an operation exists. Who knows its capabilities, until we are in a position to know the truth of what happened? And when will that be? ***

The conspiracy theory is more far-fetched than the idea that Assad is responsible.

***PH asks : On what calculus? Surely both are 'conspiracy theories' ? Mr Skalla likes one and dislikes the other. That's his privilege, but he is not in any way entitled to declare that either of them is true. Nor am I, which is why I don't ***

Let us not forget that he denied being responsible for the Sarin attack in August 2013.

***PH notes: and let us not forget that the UN report on that attack did not attribute responsibility to Assad, so he was quite entitled to make this protestation. I really do think people should have the courtesy to *read* what is written on this blog before commenting. I devoted an entire post to the question of who was responsible for the 2013 Ghouta attack. Mr Skalla obviously hasn't read it, and he looks very silly and lazy as a result. Let that be a warning to others. Read before you write. ***

That means you have to prove two frame-ups of poor Assad to get him off the hook.

***PH : I have to prove nothing. It is those who accuse who have to do the proving, and if this is the standard of their work, it will be a long time before they get anywhere. But being a member of the crowd does make people lazy about testing their beliefs, as is here proven.***

Looks like Mr. Trump is showing his true colours, the man who wasn't going to get involved in the Middle East is now pounding the infamous cave networks of Afghanistan with the Mother of Bombs in his hunt for the invisible man. A great show of force, I'm sure the millions it's cost relentlessly pounding these caves has been money well spent on a few dead lizards, a handful of bats, and the odd mountain goat.

Ky: As usual you make compelling fact-based arguments. Your point about the Tokyo attacks underscores the fact that chemical weapons aren't so very difficult to manufacture - contrary to the claims being made that the rebels didn't have the wherewithall to acquire such stuff.

Well, yes it is in way. I try to dodge making definitive statements about subjects where definitive information isn't available - as in the case of the alleged sarin attack. That indeed is my central objection to the current political and media hysteria. The eagerness of both the media and western powers to jump to conclusions about this matter is to my mind a compelling argument for suspicion about their agenda.

As I understand it neither Russia nor Syria have stated that a chemical attack took place - merely that planes hit a rebel held munitions dump containing chemical weapons.

Annia Ciezadio's commentary is clearly prejudicial, and to my mind very unconvincing. In fact I would say that the point she (?) makes about Assad's desire for funds to rebuild his country would militate against him taking the risk of using chemical weapons - thus further ostracising his country from the international community, and potential donors and investors.

Also, Assad is no slouch and must know that, contrary to his campaign pledges, Trump has many Neocon hawks in his administration and inner circle, and that many Neocons endorsed him during the campaign - Gingrich, Giuliani, David Horowitz, et al. Assad also knows that even during the campaign Trump expressed strong hostility towards Iran - an important ally of Syria. So the Syrian leader would have been extremely reckless to risk using chemical weapons when anti-Assad hawks still hold such sway in the US government - not to mention the governments of US allies.

Proponents of the "Assad did it" narrative want to have it both ways. Assad did it, they say, because he wanted to show he doesn't care about the international opinion. If he cared so little about covering his tracks why have the western media and western governments been unable to present any hard proof that the Syrians carried out the attack?

What I meant was: The rush to blame when bombs are dropped/detonated is to create pressure and thus force the inevitable carve-up, from which al-Qa'ida (whatever that means) will be just one of the 'beneficiaries'.

"That of course counters the claims of both sides but we are left with the question that if he is right who put it there?"

It is indeed a puzzle. Top of my suspects list would be Bin Laden, back from the dead, who was quickly handed the canister by Donald Trump while no one was watching ....at least that's the official story line offered by Colin and C Morrison.

When Assad was accused of using CW in 2013, that accusation ’worked’ well for the oppositions and the terrorists because Obama & co were nearly going to attack Assad and destroy his political (& physical, maybe) life. That was one of the serious crises for Assad regime, wasn't it?

I do not think, although no-one knows if Assad used CW or not in 2013, he remembers that time as a something positive one and wants to repeat it.

If Assad is a cold-blooded, self-interested and canny person, would he take such a great risk ’again’ (we don’t know) and would trust Putin that he would help him ’again’? The supposed benefits, such as Mr Wooderson writes, are overwhelmingly too small in comparison with the supposed risks for Assad, I would say.

According to Yutaka Takaoka, an expert on Syria, we have to understand the alleged use of CW by Assad in April 2017 in a context of the weakened rebels’ and terrorists’ forces, not the other way round.

We need to check if Annia Ciezadio (the Washington Post), whom Mr Wooderson has quoted, is correct to say ”'The chemical weapons attack came at a time when Assad’s military is *overstretched*”. (Emphasis added.) I think Assad had had much worse situations before.

Mr Wooderson writes to Mr Colm ”Surely either MSF are telling the truth, in which case an attack occurred, or they are lying”.

But there may be another possibilities. For instance, a CW attack occurred but not by Assad but by the terrorists in connection to the air raid by Assad. There had been information and warnings about false defectors from IS or Al Qaeda joined to the groups of rebels (and might hi-jacked some groups) and that had caused a lot of confusions and chaoses, according to the expert I mentioned above.

That is why I would like to find out if there are any evidences or possibilities that someone could produce and bring CW/Sarin from Turkey into Syria and used it in order to make the West attack Assad decisively.

As someone mentioned here, it was evidently possible to carry out Sarin attack rather easily in Tokyo in 1995 by Aum sect. They could bring sarin personally into the subway carriages without being noticed by others.

As if there was not enough doubt about who is to blame for the most recent chemical attack in Syria - one side stating the chemicals were dropped by aircraft, the other that a bomb was inadvertently dropped on a rebel held munitions dump that held chemical agents, enter the fray MIT Professor Theodore Postol, a leading expert on rocket science and missile defence systems and formerly adviser to the US Chief of Naval Operations. He has published a 9 page analytical report that can be read online, critical of the US Intelligence claims that the chemical attack was caused by a bomb or canister being dropped from the air. He contends from his analysis of both the crater and the resultant debris of the blast that a canister was placed on the ground with an explosive placed on top of it and subsequently detonated. That of course counters the claims of both sides but we are left with the question that if he is right who put it there?

Colin says, "So no, the idea that western powers - the US, France, the UK, Israel and Turkey - have been aiding and abetting Islamists is not conspiracy theory - it is established fact"

They might well have been aiding Saudi Arabia as we know they sell arms to them, I am not defending the policies of Hilary Clinton or any of them. But I am addressing this specific attack. I suppose you could believe that the US government knowingly staged a false flag attack, gassed hunders of people and then came out telling everyone how hideous this attack was and that they will not tolerate the use of chemical weapons, when really they were behind it, having conspired with the same people who massacred 2,996 of their own citizens a few years earlier. Then again, you could believe that the plane which delivered the strike must have vanished into the Bermuda Triangle, that Princess Diana was killed by MI6 agents, that 2Pac is still alive or that Humpty Dumpty will be the next leader of a Syrian democracy.

Mike B: Apologies. I mistakenly attributed to you a point made by Joshua Wooderson about whether or not I would accept the morality of the US strikes if the Syrian government were proven to be guilty of the chemical attack.

In my previous post, I asked about the case that indicates possibilities that Sarin/CW was brought in Syria from Turkey before and now.

I read today that Syrian diplomat Warif Al Halabi, charge d'affaires a.i. in Japan, said that the CW had been brought from Turkey. She told it at a press conference on 11 April in Tokyo. But it has not been reported much in media in English.

She stated that the use of the CW (on 4 April ) was a deliberate action by the terrorists and their supporters in Europe.

But again, I could not find anywhere that she mentioned any evidence of her statement.

There have been a plenty of strong words, emotional decisions, spontaneous actions and catastrophic consequences, but it is almost impossible to find firm evidences and thoughtful leaders - No, I am not only talking about now in April 2017…

This is a dodge. Surely either MSF are telling the truth, in which case an attack occurred, or they are lying. If you don't accept their report, then they must be fabricating the attack. Now, it may be that MSF have, for whatever reason, a bias towards intervention, or against Assad, as a result of what they've seen in the course of their work, but it certainly doesn't follow that they would be willing to invent an atrocity!

As far as I'm concerned, it's reasonable to doubt Assad's culpability for the attack, but not that it happened. The evidence – from video, first-hand testimony, Turkish post-mortem reports, etc.– as well as the admission by the Syrians and Russians that the attack occurred (when they have every reason to deny this), is such that you have to be already convinced of a conspiracy to question it.

'Why would chemical weapons terrify his enemies any more than conventional weapons that can immediately kill, sever limbs, cause lifelong brain injuries etc.,would?'

Because a) it's a particularly painful and gruesome method of killing, and thus demonstrates Assad's ruthlessness towards his enemies and b) it shows that he isn't cowed by the fear of Western intervention, that the West can't, or won't, stop him.

A pertinent paragraph from an article by Annia Ciezadio in the Washington Post (a neocon rag, I know): 'The chemical weapons attack came at a time when Assad’s military is overstretched. Chemical weapons are a cheap, effective force multiplier — a way to inflict terror despite limitations of manpower and supply. Their use as a tactic instills fear in civilians and rebels alike. By discouraging them from joining the last remaining pockets of rebellion, this tactic saves Assad something more precious than money: time. The sooner he finishes cleaning up, the more money he saves, and the sooner he can start raking in the billions that international donors and investors have already pledged to “reconstruct” his shattered country.'

Martin: "Is this really the most plausible scenario? That the US government did a 360 degree turn...?"

Well yes I find it quite plausible, since a 360 degree turn would place Trump exactly where the US foreign policy has been since at least the George W Bush era - making common cause with Islamists to destroy stable non Islamist regimes in the Muslim world. I fancy however that what you really mean is an "180 degree turn", in which case no such change of policy is involved.

This "conspiracy theory" canard is now so hackneyed it beggars belief that people still see it as a legitimate ad hominem jibe, much less an argument. I've never met a person in my life who wasn't a conspiracy theorist, and don't expect I ever shall. Everyone here who is arguing against Assad and Putin is touting conspiracy theories - they just seem to have a touching belief that if such a theory has the endorsement of the corporate media and western governments it magically ceases to be conspiracism.

A few very obvious facts: Even staunch defenders of the anti-Assad intevention, such as Thomas Friedman of the New York Times, admit that there are no "moderate" rebels in Syria, which surely raises the question of why the west is supporting immoderate rebels there.

The Saudis are obvvious culprits in all of this, but clearly they are not alone in taking a rather benign view of Islamist revolution in certain countries. General Flynn - late of the Trump administration - stated on TV during the relatively early stages of the Syrian conflict that Israel was backing Isis in order to destabilise the Assad regime. To add substance to this, Israeli media have stated that Isis fighters have been treated in Israeli hospitals.

Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden both stated that Saudi Arabia was the number one sponsor of terrorism in the world. This is the same Hillary who signed off on a 60 billion dollar arms deal for the Saudis, and who, in the aftermath of the alleged sarin attack last week.,called for the bombing of Assad's airfields. If she and her administration, really wanted to stop Isis surely they would have cut off funds to its state sponsors, the Saudis, and desisted from undermining the governments Isis is seeking to overthrow?

So no, the idea that western powers - the US, France, the UK, Israel and Turkey - have been aiding and abetting Islamists is not conspiracy theory - it is established fact.

'A Turkish MP who claimed sarin gas was delivered to Isis in Syria through Turkey is facing treason charges.

Ankara’s Chief Prosecutor's Office opened the case against Istanbul MP Eren Erdem of Republican People's Party (CHP) after he gave an interview to RT on Monday.

"Chemical weapon materials were brought to Turkey and put together in ISIS camps in Syria, which was known as the Iraqi Al-Qaeda at that time."

On Tuesday, Erdem said he had become the target of a smear campaign and the victim of death threats because of his statements made in parliament.

Turkish media reported that the prosecutor’s office is planning to send a summary of proceedings to the Ministry of Justice and that the Turkish parliament could vote to strip Erdem of parliamentary immunity.

Erdem said that the Turkish paramilitary organisation Ottoman Hearths had also published his home address on Twitter.

"I am being targeted with death threats because I am patriotically opposed to something that tramples on my country's prestige," Erdem said.

Sarin gas is a military-grade chemical that was used in a notorious attack on Ghouta and other neighbourhoods near Damascus in 2013.

Erdem, from the Republican People's Party (CHP), made the claims in parliament, citing evidence from an abruptly-closed criminal case.

Erdem showed parliament copy of the criminal case (number 2013/120) that was opened by the General Prosecutor's Office in the city of Adana in southern Turkey.
He said evidence from that this case shows various Turkish nationals were dealing directly with Isis and other terrorist groups in Syria, supplying them with sarin gas.

The MP said authorities conducted raids and arrested 13 suspects in the case. But a week later the case was closed and all the suspects crossed from Turkey into Syria.

"There is data in this indictment. Chemical weapon materials are being brought to Turkey and being put together in Syria in camps of Isis which was known as Iraqi Al Qaeda during that time," Erdem told RT.

He slammed the government for not investigating supply routes used by terrorists and claims Turkish citizens negotiated with Isis reps on the supply of sarin gas.

“These are all detected. There are phone recordings of this shipment like ‘don't worry about the border, we’ll take care of it' and we also see the bureaucracy is being used,” continued Erdem.'

"The most probable scenario is that the pre-notified (Russia/US data exchange) site and timing of attack were, thanks to US desire for a "false flag" excuse to indulge in regime-change, made known to the terrorists."

Conspiracy theorists of the world unite behind 'C Morrison'. Is this really the most probable scenario? That the US government suddenly did a 360 degree U-turn on policy, when they knew all along, that they were collaborating with 'Al Queda' (the people who years earlier bombed the World Trade Centre and caused them to engage in years of bombing campaigns to get the most wanted man in the world). Or is the most probable scenario that these jihadists saw the Americans running for the hills and thought they would stage a chemical attack because they knew that the Americans would come running back once images of dying children were beamed onto the TV screens of emotionally charged 'liberal's who think that charging to war is the best way to avenge these people, regardless of the fact that many more innocent people will die? Or the other probability which you cannot disprove, that the extreme Islamist dictator Assad was responsible? Only moments ago you were telling me no one celebrated the 9/11 massacre which turned out to be bogus. Why should we believe the next conspiracy theory on your check list?

Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear on this weblog until the moderator has approved them. They must not exceed 500 words. Web links cannot be accepted, and may mean your whole comment is not published.